Thread: LOST [Spoilers]

Haha, yeah, I figured. I'm two episodes in, it's actually really good so far. I can't believe I never watched this before.

It confirmed that Widmore dumped the plane.

I thought that was already confirmed.

There was a degree of ambiguity to it - first, Tom talked about it, then Ben, 2 people who can't be trusted.

Then, Naomi had Miles talk to the dead guy - but it never mentioned that Widmore was behind the plan wreckage, only that the dead guy had information about it and was killed (implying that either Widmore killed him for knowing too much, or someone else killed him to get the information). And the special outright said that Widmore was behind it.

Well I thought it was very obvious that Widmore dumped the dummy plane

Woot, I am done with Season One.

Originally Posted by KT.

Well I thought it was very obvious that Widmore dumped the dummy plane

Yeah, I guess it was just one of those implied things that you and I took as confirmed. Good to be sure, though.

No, he's pretty dead.

Daniel is dead. Whatever happened, happened. No one sets off the hydrogen bomb.

Or if they do, it's what causes The Incident.

My guess is that uh, Chang evacuates some of the island, stops work on The Swan, but Jack and Co get the bomb and drop it into the electromagnet and that sets off The First Incident.

I mean you don't introduce a gun in a play without it going off - that's sloppy writing - and I doubt they would introduce an H bomb without it detonating.

well I hope you're right

yeah they have been making a point to remind people about the H bomb

I also think the missing reels from the tapes they fiound in the 'present' for the Dharma orientation might be frames that have them in it.

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

I mean you don't introduce a gun in a play without it going off - that's sloppy writing - and I doubt they would introduce an H bomb without it detonating.

No, you don't introduce a gun in a play without it going off unless the fact that it doesn't go off is integral to the play. Jesus Christ, Chekhov should be shot for that half-arsed metaphor.

If Jeremy Davies doesn't win some sort of acting award for that episode then there is just no justice.

Right yes let's introduce something big that we expect to pay off later and then never come back to it.

What, was the H-bomb called "Libby" or something?

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

What, was the H-bomb called "Libby" or something?

heheh

I don't think anyone will set off the bomb. I can't see an H bomb going off on Lost, firstly, and it doesn't seem like the Island had ever taken that much damage.

I don't think it's weak writing to introduce a plot point like this and have us keep coming back to it until one last time where people desperately try, and fail, to set it off.

Also, goddamn. Daniel shouldn't be dead.






edit: also, everyone DID see ellie shooting dan coming, right

Originally Posted by gwahir

edit: also, everyone DID see ellie shooting dan coming, right

Yes, everyone. Didn't really take anything away from the episode though.

We saw her shooting him just like we saw Widmore was his father.

In S1, shit like that would have tripped me up real bad.

But now, they introduce a new character, you try and figure out just how they fit into the grand scheme. Which I like. And some twists still catch me off guard.

The first time Charlie died, my sister cried so much. The second time, when he got knifed in the jungle in one of Desmond's flashes, she cried even harder. By the time he died for good, she quit the show.

Quite like Alan Dale

"At that point I felt like I had watched them wandering in a line through the forests a bit sweaty for the 1000th time. I thought 'I can't watch this anymore'. Then out of the bushes came a black cloud, which grabbed a black man and threw him to the ground, and I thought 'I definitely can't watch this anymore'."

Goes back to mp's quote:

"At the point they introduce time travel, you know the show has jumped the shark."

And there's still unanswered simple questions like why did the Others walk barefoot through the jungle when the French chick already knew they were relatively civilized? And why wouldn't she just tell Sayid and the rest of them?

There's no good reason for it, except the bullshit explained away after you're broken suspension of disbelief.

Them walking barefoot through the jungle was nothing to do with them being civilised/uncivilised. It was about stealth and leaving less of a followable trail.

Deciding a show has jumped the shark is a personal decision, not a science Mal.

I agree with mp.

Well New Scientist magazine said their time travel stuff is relatively solid and in line with what science knows so far.

Either way, if all you're going to do is watch the show and then spiel itt about how said show is not worth watching then what's the point in using this thread in the first place?

Originally Posted by Mr. E

Deciding a show has jumped the shark is a personal decision, not a science Mal.

I agree with mp.

Huh? I was under the impression that 'jumping the shark' was a consensus, while 'dislike a show due to personal reasons unrelated to quality' was a personal choice.

Technically, Mal is right about the term Jumping The Shark.

However, Mr. E's term is correct in common parlance. Or at least acceptable, anyhow.

I was under the assumption that it seemed like consensus generally because it is obvious, but that consensus was not a mandatory requirement, as I've heard of shows having multiple points of jumping the shark. There used to be a website where you could go and vote on where you thought particular shows jumped the shark, but I don't think it exists anymore, or it got bought by TV guide and made shitty or something.

Anecdote time!

I work in a doctor's office, and on the tapes I transcribe, one doctor says "Crepitance" on the tape. So far that he will spell it out. "C-R-E-P-I-T-A-N-C-E".

However, it is techincally not the right phrasing, as Crepitance is not a word. The word he is looking for is "Crepitus" or "Crepitation".

But common parlance says that the doctor is techincally correct. Even though he is using a word that is not real.

In any case, I always sub in 'Crepitus', which I feel drives him crazy, as he always will sternly spell out 'Crepitance'.

Moral of this story? Little technicalities bother me sometimes.

EDIT: It did get bought by TV Guide. And while you could vote on specific moments that you felt the show jumped, only the highest voted was considered the moment that the show truly 'jumped the shark'.

Originally Posted by simonj

Them walking barefoot through the jungle was nothing to do with them being civilised/uncivilised. It was about stealth and leaving less of a followable trail.

They were deliberately painted in the initial exposure to be almost uncivilized, animalistic, and almost subhuman. The only glimpses we had of them were barefoot, dirty, and savage. The only reason this changed was because the camera angle of them changed, not the knowledge of the Lost. It doesn't fit.

Originally Posted by MalReynolds

EDIT: Also, how would she know they were 'relatively civilized'? Because they showed up with guns and stole her baby? They did the same thing with Walt at the end of S1.

Ben was wearing cleanly pressed and laundered clothing, was clean-cut and shaved, and relatively calm and collected. All things considered, he looked human. Throughout the show, the Others always looked more human than Reneau, except when they were first alluded to, for no good reason. You forget that we've now seen the scene where Ben takes her baby; he looked like a yuppie in hiking boots.

Compare that to the "We're gonna have to take your boy" scene. Did he grow a ratty, gnarled beard and half-ruined clothes just to fuck with the Lost? Or was it that the writers decided to change their positioning mid-series and just ignored it?

And Mal, the term "Jumped the Shark" has nothing to do with retrospective. The show can very well be in-progress and have jumped the shark. It doesn't have to be finished, which is the only thing preventing Lost from qualifying.

Uh, no. Sun found costumes when they were injecting her with whatever to ensure her baby didn't die in the womb, implying that The Other's dressed up as a form of psychological warfare.

EDIT: And I do not find the show has a stark decline in quality, therefore, the show has not jumped the shark, nor has it for millions of viewers.

Why wouldn't Reneau have clarified that oh wait

The guy who said "we're gonna have to take your boy" was wearing a false beard. That was revealed to us quite clearly.

Yes, they showed us the Others in a specific way because they wanted us (and the survivors) to make specific assumptions about them. Just because they then showed you how incorrect those assumptions were does not make it a shitty narrative device.

Well, touche about the beard. It didn't turn out a useless ruse, but there was an obvious out that should've been explained, "Hey, they don't usually walk around barefoot and dirty!"

No reason Reneau had survived for 16 years without knowing that, and at least mentioning it at some point before Ben shows up.